Lessons for Anarcho-Capitalists


14 thoughts on “Lessons for Anarcho-Capitalists

  1. Anarcho-Capitalists, like all anarchists, wipe their feet on the Constitution, specifically in the line in the Preamble about ‘the common Welfare.’ But then, why would they ever acknowledge a set of laws written for The People.

    The only ‘laws’ that this knot of radicals wants are laws protecting their freedom to do whatever the hell they want in order to engorge themselves.

    1. Muddy, you’re referring to promoting “the general welfare”.

      1st off, “promoting” the general welfare means to allow for an atmosphere where happiness, prosperity and well-being aren’t hindered by the government but, pushed forward.

      You seem to have the idea stuck in your head that “promoting the general welfare” means that the government is responsible for the people’s needs as in public assistance.
      You’re wrong.

      And, even *IF* they were referring to the term “welfare” as it’s been used since 1965, the word “promote” does not mean “provide” in any context you want to spin it.

      As for wiping feet on the constitution, hows that war powers act been working lately?
      In typical liberal fashion, just redefine, replace or, create a new meaning for the word “war” and, that nasty little law no longer applies!
      Unless of course you happen to be on the exploding end of it all!

      Anarco capitalists? We’ve been dealing with what amounts to anarco-liberalism for years and, folks like you promote it!

      Why have many different people conducting private business and succeeding or, failing on their own merit of how much personal effort they put into their own endeavors and reaping their own reward in doing so?
      That sounds like a much freer society than your ideal that 500 government-crats can make everyone’s personal choices better than the individual himself can!
      Which pretty much just leads to 1 group trying to elect people who will dictate other’s lives based on how that group feels those lives should be lived.
      Libertarianism…as long as my deeds aren’t harming you, my deeds aren’t your damned business and vice-versa.

      Liberalism…if I don’t agree with how you live your life, I’ll use the power of government in order to force you to live your life they way I see fit!

      You libs have come a long ways from “Live and let live”

  2. Wow Laci, you managed to find a communist to explain Libertarianism and an anarchist (a confused communist) to explain conservatism to you!
    Did it take you long to dig up just the right 2 clowns to tell you what you wanted to hear?

  3. SO, I can get a clown like you tell me bullshit which is incorrect, eh seppo.

    Sorry, but Libertarianism is basically anarchy, but with a corporatocratic bent.

    If I don’t like how to live my life, then they will have the cops come down on me.

    Or their hired goons like seppo.

    1. Anarchy is a state of lawlessness. Libertarianism does not promote lawlessness. It does promote keeping the government in check and out of affairs it has no business involving it’s self with.

      And please…pleasssssse tell me how to get one of those “hired goon” jobs you seem to think every conservative can find!

      I might be looking for a fun summer job to fill a few days off!

      1. Sepp again demonstrates that he has no idea of complicated political ideas. Here we have the accepted polisci definition of Anarchy:

        The term “anarchy” describes the simple absence of publicly recognized government or enforced political authority. When used in this sense, anarchy may or may not imply political disorder or lawlessness within a society. In another sense, anarchy may not refer to a complete lack of authority or political organization, but instead refer to a social state characterized by absolute direct democracy or libertarianism.

        Sepp, in his usual ignorance has confused Anarchy with nihilism.

        Libertarians and Anarchists are those who advocate the absence of the state, arguing that inherent human nature would allow people to come together in agreement to form a functional society allowing for the participants to freely develop their own sense of morality, ethics or principled behaviour.

        The only difference between Libertarianism and Anarchy is that Libertarians tend to be facists who like to hide that they are facists by using Anarchism’s terminology. Libertarians who are smart admit this. The ones who are ignorant dickheads don’t (note thet seppo the clown didn’t challenge my quote from Libertarian Murray N. Rothbard admitting Libertarianism’s relationship to anarchy).

        Seppo again demonstrates he is an ignorant dickhead who thinks he knows far more than the experts, but doesn’t know shit.

  4. The slogan “individual responsibility” is popular among libertarians, but it is not individuals or individual liberties that they are concerned. It is the “rights” of businesses, large and small (but especially large) to make a substantial profit without government strictures, oversight, or intervention. In their view, corporations should be able to pollute the air, water, and soil, sell shoddy or dangerous goods, and violate the rights of their workers. The faith of these ideologues in the free market is as fervent, inflexible, and insusceptible of proof as John Calvin’s belief in predestination. According to anarcho-capitalists, a restaurant that gives its customers food poisoning will just go out of business; an automobile company that installs faulty brakes will lose its customer base. Because the market, like a mysterious Providence, eventually intervenes, neither regulation nor compensation is required. Similarly, certain prominent anarchists declared that “anarchy is order!”—meaning that if authorities did not interfere, things would naturally sort themselves out.

    And people like seppo who “want” to work 62 hours a week and not retire.

  5. The individualist anarchists have contributed a great deal to libertarian thought. They have provided some of the best statements of individualism and antistatism that have ever been penned. In the political sphere, the individualist anarchists were generally sound libertarians. They favored private property, extolled free competition, and battled all forms of governmental intervention. Politically, the Tucker anarchists had two principal defects: (1) they failed to advocate defense of private landholdings beyond what the owner used personally; (2) they relied too heavily on juries and failed to see the necessity for a body of constitutional libertarian law which the private courts would have to uphold.

  6. “And people like seppo who “want” to work 62 hours a week and not retire.”

    We’ve been over this and, you’re really not going to change the truth by trying to put words in my mouth.

    Working those hours at a job I like doing serves 2 purposes.
    I keep busy working for 9 months (during the crap weather) and have most of the good weather to play in.
    I live off of a 40 hour paycheck and, bank that extra 44 hours per paycheck that is all time and a half pay into an IRA account.

    Add that to my 401k deduction @ 10% with company matched funds and, I’ll be sure to stop into the UK on my way back to Germany and buy you a beer…unless you’re working.

    1. So, seppo is taking two people’s jobs. Not to mention getting down on public employees for getting good bennies, and then claiming to get good bennies.

      And boasting about it.

      Of course, I keep wondering how much seppo is just shooting off his mouth without thinking in an attempt to impress us. I betcha he is sitting on his arse collecting unemployment while whining about the government.

      No matter how you cut it, seppo, you are an arrogant jerk.

      The only thing you impress me with is the fact that you are an asshole. You don’t know your arse from your elbow.

      If I ever meet you in person, I intend on beating some sense into you and hope your health care is as good as you claim it is. You odious fuck.

  7. Now why should government “promote” or “Provide” an IRA or a 401K? Where does the constitution say that is the government’s responsibility to provide either of these financial vehicles?

    1. Additionally, these financial vehicles rely upon investments, which are subject to market forces.

      In other words, one can lose their shirts (and retirements) by placing their reliance upon these for their future.

  8. Very true, Laci….M_R has written about this. It is a yo-yo…The ups and downs of the stock market. In my case I continue to play the game. In 2008-early 2009 my retirement portfolio lost 35%, yet today my portfolio is back 40%, so I’ve gotten back to even. Yet, there is the loss from 2007 to mid-2009.

    However, what is happening now? I fear that Congress is fiddling with all of our savings over our debt limit increase. To hold our previous debts as bait to obtain future program cuts is stupid. I think that I am at the point where I would tell Obama to let it roll, you know? Let the GOP vote the debt extension down, and let them pay the price. Dont let the GOP tell us to cut spending for extension of the debt limit. Zero in on what Engineer has pointed out under George Bush and his debt extensions, and how the GOP voted for every single one. If I have to sacrifice my life long saving accounts, then I am prepared to do my patriotic duty and accept that loss in the hope that things will get better as the GOP ride their stupidity into the ground. Let the GOP reap the whirlwind…..

Comments are closed.